The lancet oncology
-
The lancet oncology · May 2016
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter StudyPazopanib plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours resistant to imatinib and sunitinib (PAZOGIST): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial.
Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) are the most common mesenchymal neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract. Imatinib followed by sunitinib and regorafenib is the standard sequence of treatment for advanced disease. Pazopanib is effective in soft tissue sarcomas but has never been assessed in advanced GIST in a randomised trial. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pazopanib in patients with previously treated advanced GIST. ⋯ GlaxoSmithKline, French National Cancer Institute, EuroSARC (FP7-278742), Centre Léon Bérard.
-
The lancet oncology · May 2016
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter StudyPonatinib versus imatinib for newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukaemia: an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.
Ponatinib has shown potent activity against chronic myeloid leukaemia that is resistant to available treatment, although it is associated with arterial occlusion. We investigated whether this activity and safety profile would result in superior outcomes compared with imatinib in previously untreated patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia. ⋯ ARIAD Pharmaceuticals.
-
The lancet oncology · May 2016
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter StudyLung cancer incidence and mortality in National Lung Screening Trial participants who underwent low-dose CT prevalence screening: a retrospective cohort analysis of a randomised, multicentre, diagnostic screening trial.
Annual low-dose CT screening for lung cancer has been recommended for high-risk individuals, but the necessity of yearly low-dose CT in all eligible individuals is uncertain. This study examined rates of lung cancer in National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) participants who had a negative prevalence (initial) low-dose CT screen to explore whether less frequent screening could be justified in some lower-risk subpopulations. ⋯ None.
-
Appropriate safety evaluations of anticancer drugs are crucial to assess their benefit-risk ratio. Substantial evidence shows that clinicians under-report harm in clinical trials, and at least three factors contribute to this problem: assessment of harm by clinicians might not represent the experience of patients; harm might be detected within trials, but is not reported appropriately by investigators or reporting is influenced by sponsors; and short-term follow-up might not detect long-term and potentially serious toxicities. ⋯ New approaches for the conduct, oversight, and reporting of clinical trials should include patient-reported assessment of side-effects. Effective pharmacovigilance programmes and large-scale observational studies are needed to improve understanding of the tolerability of anticancer drugs in a real world setting.
-
The lancet oncology · May 2016
ReviewEthical issues of clinical trials in paediatric oncology from 2003 to 2013: a systematic review.
A state-of-the art approach to the debates on ethical issues is key in order to gain guidance on research practices involving sick children and adolescents, as well as to identify research avenues in which it might be worth cooperating, to generate better or supplementary evidence. Based on a systematic literature search using MEDLINE, we report the main ethical developments in paediatric oncology clinical trials from 2003-13. The present knowledge about normative and empirical ethical demands in this setting is quantified and summarised in a list of 46 issues. ⋯ Our systematic Review shows how important it is for professionals to engage in a constant reflection on optimum trial designs, on the effect of offering trial participation on key family dynamics, and on the ways to understand families' needs and values accurately. In view of present scientific developments, we further emphasise the need to enhance societal awareness about research in children and adolescents, to prevent so-called research fatigue in small populations due to multiple solicitations or inadequate legal demands, and to reassess longstanding ethical certainties in the strictest view of promoting sick children's interests. This systematic Review allows a series of questions to be drawn to guide and encourage collective and individual endeavours that should lead to constant improvements in our research practices in paediatric clinical oncology research.